Who should our targets be? Or should we just use the cap room to collect shitty contracts in exchange for draft picks and suck for one more year?

I'd love to get Gordon but he's restricted and I'd imagine it will take a max offer. I have to think that either A. another team more to his liking would give him that (Indiana?) or B. the Hornets would match.

"Well then I guess there's only one thing left to do...win the whole, f***in', thing."- Jake Taylor

Draftpicks and sucking unless you want to win now, which we shouldn't. I think you have to take a shot at those guys because you might just luck into a good talent, but I don't think we have the clout to get a big name free agent.

I think you sign Gee to something reasonable, as start him at the two or three depending on who we end up drafting. Try and sign a big for depth, and fill in any remaining holes with D-leaguers (although they have been playing far better than they should be right now).

If you looked at the history of the team, and noted the top ten free agents they've signed in their history, including when they had the best player in the league as a draw, well, that will afford you the ability to rule out anyone you could think of that could actually play.

Nobody is coming to Cleveland Ohio to play basketball unless the draft forces them to, or they blow and have no other options. Again, that ain't me talkin', it's the history of the team.

To be fair, outside of the four RFAs the Cavs could potentially just overpay for the services of anyone else on the list and they will have to, as they are incredibly far from this year's salary floor and even further from next years.

But if the Cavs give Gordon a max offer sheet, isn't there a chance they'd be the only ones to do it? And NO isn't owned by the league anymore so the need to match and save face from the CP3 trade is lessened. I think it's possible that they'd pass or work out a decent trade package. Gordon would be pretty overpaid but as said above, that's the only way to get a good player to come here. He's not a max player but I think he's a $9M-$10M player. The way stupid money gets thrown around in the NBA, that overpayment is worth it in my opinion.

But if the RFA's are off the board, I have to agree that the rest of the options are pretty underwhelming. I'd stick to short deals and/or value plays on guys like Jeff Green. Goran Dragic is a solid player but there are guys like him available every year. I'd rather set us up for one more good draft.

"Well then I guess there's only one thing left to do...win the whole, f***in', thing."- Jake Taylor

Goran Dragic is a monster, but the problem is that he is a pure PG. The last thing the Cavs need is to pay big money for a pure point (and go look at Dragic's numbers with Lowry out this month... sick).

And Rumors are Gordon is getting a max offer from Indy, where he will return him and make that team bonafide.

Last edited by e0y2e3 on Thu Apr 19, 2012 10:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

If you looked at the history of the team, and noted the top ten free agents they've signed in their history, including when they had the best player in the league as a draw, well, that will afford you the ability to rule out anyone you could think of that could actually play.

Nobody is coming to Cleveland Ohio to play basketball unless the draft forces them to, or they blow and have no other options. Again, that ain't me talkin', it's the history of the team.

If there's anything that Dan Gilbert has proven, it's that he has no problem drunkenly spending when he sees fit. Cavs might have the most cap room of anyone on the league; the smart money would be to stay strong and not sign anyone til you're ready to compete which could be as soon as after next season.

I don't think Dan Gilbert is strong. There will be an overpaid FA in Cleveland next year. My guess is Chris Kaman.

And that is a solid guess. Plus honestly, it isn't like Gilbert has a choice, he has to spend $10+MM. The real question is can he spread that between several high upside low guys or will he foolishy throw it at a bum like Kamen.

And that is a solid guess. Plus honestly, it isn't like Gilbert has a choice, he has to spend $10+MM. The real question is can he spread that between several high upside low guys or will he foolishy throw it at a bum like Kamen.

Kaman isn't flashy enough, suave enough, and has been reeking of burnt toast this season. Not the guy to marquee with Kyrie and the lotto pick in the season where Gilbert will finally have his casino open. My guess is he'll throw max deals and draft picks at restricted guys like Gordon and see who bites.

"The fucking Who...... If I want to watch old people run around ill go set fire to a nursing home." - CDT

Its going to hinge on the draft. If we get Beal we're not pursuing Gordon. If we get MKG we're not pursuing Batum. If we get Drummond we're not pursuing Kaman. Etc etc. The only guy who wouldn't affect who we target is Anthony Davis.

Ziner wrote:But do you think Tristan has any value, he sort of seems as if he might be a decent guy to just have come off the bench.

Have been meaning to ask your thoughts on Gee. Is he someone who can develop to where he can be a legit starter on a team that can compete or he just going to be a role player off the bench

Without the League Pass and 1 national televised games I haven't followed along much this year. Just box score watching.

Yeah, TT would probably end up on the bench but it really makes little sense to have a shot blocker rebounder that will never start sitting behind the best shot blocker, rebounder prospect since Dewey. I'd imagine they end up trading him after a year or so ala Hickson.

And Gee can be a rotation player. He's not a playoff caliber starter but if he is one of the first few guys off the bench you're in good shape.

If you looked at the history of the team, and noted the top ten free agents they've signed in their history, including when they had the best player in the league as a draw, well, that will afford you the ability to rule out anyone you could think of that could actually play.

Nobody is coming to Cleveland Ohio to play basketball unless the draft forces them to, or they blow and have no other options. Again, that ain't me talkin', it's the history of the team.

Yeah? Tell that to John Freaking Battle, buddy!

Last guy that smack talked John Battle got a 2x4 in the Richfield Coliseum tunnel.

And eo, is correct, there is another way - to have waaay more money available then anyone else and then ridiculously and stupidly overpay someone. So there's that.

Not a huge deal, but taking on Walton's 6.1 for next year might help us not overpay for long term on one of these mid-range guys. I think/assume we still have enough for a max/near-max offer, and that's about all I'd consider this year. Take a shot at Hibbert or Gordon or maybe Lopez. If not, then re-sign Gee and Samuels, pick up Gibson's option, and add the #4 pick money and we should be close to the floor. Hell, throw another 8 million at Antawn for next year if you want to hold out for '13-'14.

I think Hibbert is the target. Would be a good fit next to Thompson...he has enough range offensively, IMO. If Indy is going to make a play for Gordon, they can't possibly afford Hibbert as well. Would also move Andy to the bench, where he hopefully will stay healthy this year. Because this is going to be our last chance to get anything of value for him.

Counting the cap holds for Hibbert and Hill, the Pacer's salary for next year is less than $28 million. Stupid amounts of cap space.

I agree about pursing Mahimi. Plays his role well, hit a couple of big jumpers in the finals last year, good size. I also really liked what I saw out of Trey Thompkins on the Clippers during the preseason games. 6'10, good athlete, has an all around offensive game. Can post up, hit a jumper, drive to the hoop, and has decent handles for a guy his size. He hasn't had much opportunity to show his talents, but he could probably be had for cheap and would be nice big depth. Jordan Hill has been playing fairly well this year in limited minutes as well.

As far as T-Will goes, what would we have to lose. If he stinks, he helps us in draft position. If he is good, then that helps us win games. He isn't going to be a game maker/breaker either way, but on a team seriously devoid of talent, especially on the wings, can we afford to not take some risks? By the time we would be ready to seriously compete, we would know whether T-Will or a similar troubled player is going to be a piece.

Assuming they pick up Gibson's TO, (they will so no use debating whether they should), they have 6 players under contract for next year accounting for $31MM. Throw in almost $15MM for Baron and they are right up against the floor even before you include in the 8-9 other bodies that they will need to add to fill out a roster.

Point being, as it stands now, they could fill the balance of the roster with rookie FA's or vet minimums and not have to worry about the floor. The beauty of the amnesty; however, is that it doesn't count against the cap so they do have flexibility to spend if they choose to do so, but the CBA will not force their hand this offseason.

When the time comes, this organization will spend the $$$ via trade and not via traditional FA, unless global warming and FitzGerald turn Calahooga into Dade overnight. Not saying that is right, wrong or indifferent but being aggressive via the draft and trade front is the player acquisition philosophy of the front office backed by Gilly's wallet.

StewieG wrote:Could have just bought him out, traded for a player with a crappy contract (Hedo Turkoglu?) and a draft pick or two, and used the amnesty on them.

Not saying that option was necessarily on the table, but if it was, that would have been the route I would have gone.

Which does.... what? With multiple years left on Baron's contract, you're paying 95% of what's left for the buyout. Then what, you get a crappy draft pick and the check you have to write out goes from $30 million to $60 million for a 2nd buyout/amnesty? No thanks.

Just because the Cavs scored big-time when they initially took on Baron's contract, doesn't mean it will happen again. Not every team drunkenly throws around unprotected 1st's like Donald Sterling. Can't count on that strategy every year.

rebelwithoutaclue wrote:Which does.... what? With multiple years left on Baron's contract, you're paying 95% of what's left for the buyout. Then what, you get a crappy draft pick and the check you have to write out goes from $30 million to $60 million for a 2nd buyout/amnesty? No thanks.

Just because the Cavs scored big-time when they initially took on Baron's contract, doesn't mean it will happen again. Not every team drunkenly throws around unprotected 1st's like Donald Sterling. Can't count on that strategy every year.

You're paying Baron's full salary now anyways. Now it doesn't count against the cap. With a buyout, it would. And yes, the strategy would be to pick up a couple of crappy draft picks. Maybe you hit, maybe you miss. Maybe you trade them to move up a few spots and get someone you like. The goal is to find someone like a Marshawn Brooks, who drops, or a Ryan Anderson who comes out of nowhere to be effective, or a Serge Ibaka, who nobody knew anything about except, apparently, OKC's scouts.

Yes, more than likely you get Kosta Koufos. Or best case, Courtney Lee. But if you have to spend the money to hit the salary floor anyways, why not pick up a couple draft picks while you're at it and maybe find someone you can plug into your rotation?

You're paying Baron's salary now anyways, but not a 2nd player's buyout. I understand the premise but $30 million (the price of the 2nd buyout) is a steep price to pay for a roll of the dice. I'd rather they reach the salary floor by signing a couple of young guys coming off their rookie contracts with upside, even if they have to overpay them by $1-2 million a season just to get them here (Ian Mahimi, etc.).

I thought I remembered reading this, not that this adds anything, just some resources if yer inclined.

The salary of any player waived via the amnesty clause will continue to count toward the salary floor. This could be of major interest to a team such as the Wizards, who would fall so far under the salary floor (about $49 million per team) by using amnesty on Rashard Lewis as to make the provision almost unworkable for them this season. But if Lewis’ $20.6 million salary continues to count toward that floor — and not against the cap — even after amnesty, the provision is more useful in the short term. Regardless, the Wizards indicated last week that they will not use the amnesty clause on Lewis this season. That makes some sense, considering this center-heavy free-agent class doesn’t have much to offer a team trying to develop its own big man (JaVale McGee).http://nba-point-forward.si.com/2011/12 ... on-emerge/

Something more recent to corroborate...There are two major reasons to use the provision: to clear cap space for free agency and to get under the luxury tax. Because teams still have to pay the full value of the contract, even though it no longer counts on the cap or towards the luxury tax (but does count towards the salary floor of 85% of the cap), it’s not an easy decision.http://www.hoopsworld.com/amnesty-2012- ... -provision

"When a man with money meets a man with experience, the man with experience leaves with money and the man with money leaves with experience."

For S's & G's, let's say a team like the cars doesn't want to get bogged down long-term by a crummy player but has to hit a cap floor. Could they pay a Hudson a Google dollars on a 10 day and meet the floor but be free and clear on day 11 from any encumbrance for the next season?

jb wrote:For S's & G's, let's say a team like the cars doesn't want to get bogged down long-term by a crummy player but has to hit a cap floor. Could they pay a Hudson a Google dollars on a 10 day and meet the floor but be free and clear on day 11 from any encumbrance for the next season?

I'll let others prove me correct via links later - youse old timers know me well enough to believe me - if a team is short of the salary floor, practically speaking, the owner has to pay "The Diff" between actual salary and the floor to existing players on the roster as a sort of "bonus". Think of it as an Obama tax to spread the wealth to the existing roster. In reality, I don't think the salary floor is ever going to cause a sh!tty penny pinching team to do anything stoopid and wreck long term cap flexibility. It is a provision that will easily be worked around ... have you ever heard of an NFL team having a problem with it as it exists in the NFL CBA also?

I just started pouring through the new CBA FAQ Coon posted a few days ago. I assume you give up receiving lux tax payments. Either way, the money cannot be banked, but is also does not appear that it must be tied up in crap contracts. Though I just started looking at this stuff in depth...

"When a man with money meets a man with experience, the man with experience leaves with money and the man with money leaves with experience."

Tax Money can be banked, and historically teams are VERY reluctant to let it go. That reluctance is only going to grow as the tax penalties start going through the roof, since you are looking at league where revenue sharing is mainly driven by the tax.